In what was one of the most anticipated crossover boxing events of the year, Anthony Joshua and Jake Paul squared off in a blockbuster fight streamed globally on Netflix on December 19, 2025. The bout — which saw Joshua deliver a dramatic sixth‑round knockout — was more than just a sporting spectacle. Behind the scenes, it also became a historic financial story, revealing how tax laws can fundamentally reshape an athlete’s payday.
Although the fight was celebrated worldwide, the numbers tell a fascinating story: the “pay slip” for Joshua’s payday looks dramatically different once Uncle Sam and the UK’s taxman take their share. Let’s break down exactly how much Joshua likely earned, what he had to pay in taxes in both the United States and United Kingdom, and why this represents a major case study in international tax obligations for global athletes.
A Historic Netflix Fight With Massive Purse Figures
The fight’s purse was extraordinary. Reports suggest that the total financial package for the Joshua vs. Paul fight was anywhere from $184 million to potentially $267 million, though precise figures varied between sources.
Industry estimates lean toward the lower end of that range, with roughly $184 million believed to be the combined purse. Split evenly, this would mean about $92 million for each fighter before expenses, taxes, and deductions.
Whether the purse was the conservative estimate of $184 million, or the more optimistic $267 million figure promoted by Jake Paul on social media platforms, one thing was clear: this was one of the most financially significant boxing matchups in recent memory — largely due to Netflix’s role as the primary broadcaster.
Why the Fight Was Unique: Netflix Instead of Traditional Pay‑Per‑View
Traditionally, high‑profile boxing matches — especially heavyweight bouts — are sold through pay‑per‑view (PPV) platforms that charge fans a one‑off fee for access. This model can generate massive revenue if millions of fans purchase the fight individually.
However, the Joshua‑Paul fight was streamed exclusively on Netflix. And unlike PPV, Netflix subscribers didn’t have to pay an additional fee to watch the fight — it was included in their regular subscription.
This distribution model represented a break from boxing’s conventional revenue streams, signaling how digital streaming platforms are reshaping the sport’s financial landscape. For athletes like Joshua — whose global recognition extends far beyond sport — this also drove unprecedented viewership and financial opportunity.
US Taxes: Uncle Sam Takes a Big Cut
Despite the excitement and media buzz, the reality of international taxation hit hard.
The fight took place in Miami, Florida — a state with no state income tax. However, this only offers a small tax advantage. The United States federal government taxes income earned on US soil, and high earners like Joshua are subject to the highest income tax bracket — 37% under federal law.
Applying this rate to Joshua’s estimated $92 million payday roughly results in a federal tax bill of around $34 million–$52 million depending on deductions and specific reporting structure, before state taxes or other fees.
Even though Florida doesn’t tax income, the federal obligation still represents a massive deduction — essentially removing well over a third of the gross fight purse before Joshua even heads home.
UK Taxes: Global Income Taxation for Residents
The tax situation gets even more complex once Joshua returns to his home base in the United Kingdom.
As a UK resident, Joshua is required to declare global income for tax purposes. That means money he earned in the US isn’t treated as exempt — and he can be taxed again on the same income under UK tax law.
In the UK, the top income tax rate can be as much as 45% for high earners. However, the British system provides double taxation relief — meaning Joshua doesn’t pay the full rate again if he’s already paid tax in another country. What happens instead is that the UK calculates how much tax he would owe under British rules, subtracts what he already paid in the US, and then charges the difference.
Reports estimate Joshua’s UK tax obligation — after credit for US tax — to be around $11.3 million, with additional national insurance contributions of roughly $2.8 million.
These combined obligations add up significantly.
Crunching the Numbers: Net Pay After Tax
When the layers of taxation in both the US and UK are applied, the overall tax burden on Joshua’s historic Netflix fight paycheck becomes more clear:
Gross earnings from fight: approx. $92 million (before deductions)
US federal income tax: approx. 37% of purse
UK income tax + National Insurance: additional tax burden once home
Total tax bill: roughly $66 million
Net take‑home pay: approximately $74 million after all taxes
This means that Joshua ultimately walks away with about 53% of his original gross earnings — a stunning reduction considering how headline figures dominated media coverage.
In absolute terms, Joshua loses around half his fight payout to a combination of taxes — a powerful reminder that even the biggest checks don’t always translate to equivalent notebooks in a bank account.
Comparative Tax Burden: Why Paul Keeps More
In contrast to Joshua’s situation, Jake Paul — although a US resident and subject to the same federal tax rate — doesn’t have a secondary UK tax obligation. Because he doesn’t owe British taxes on his US earnings, his net take‑home pay ends up larger as a percentage of gross earnings.
This contrast has fueled commentary and discussions among fans and analysts, with many noting that Paul may keep more of his money despite losing the actual fight inside the ring.
It’s an ironic twist in the financial narrative — a non‑traditional boxer retaining more money simply because of tax residency rules.
Implications for Global Athletes
Joshua’s Netflix fight pay slip underscores several broader trends and considerations:
1. Global Tax Obligations Matter
Athletes earning income internationally must navigate multiple tax systems, potentially resulting in higher overall tax burdens.
2. Digital Streaming Revenues Change the Game
Platforms like Netflix alter not only how fans watch fights, but also how fighters get paid — and taxed.
3. Legacy vs. Take‑Home Pay
Even historic sporting moments may come with a reality check about the difference between headline earnings and actual net income.
4. Residency and Tax Strategy Become Central
For globally mobile stars, where they live can have as much impact on their check as what they earn.
Anthony Joshua’s payday from his historic Netflix fight with Jake Paul remains impressive by any standard. Walking away with close to $74 million after tax is still a remarkable achievement — especially compared to most professional athletes worldwide.
Yet it also provides a fascinating case study of how international tax laws interact with modern sports economics. What looks like a gargantuan payday on paper can shrink dramatically after career‑management costs, tax liabilities, and national rules are applied.
In a global sporting landscape increasingly shaped by streaming platforms, crossover events, and massive international purses, Joshua’s example may become a blueprint — and a cautionary tale — for how elite athletes navigate their biggest financial moments.
0 Comments